July 25, 2011

As you know, I saw the movie last week and thought that as a movie, it was pretty bad. It's a separate question — though Palin fans have a hard time seeing it — whether the movie supplies us with material that is convincing on the subject of whether Palin should run for President.

The material — which impresses some people, even to the point of getting confused into thinking that the movie is good — shows Sarah Palin's rise to power in Alaska and her excellent achievements and immense popularity as governor. The problem is that all of this happened in the context of boldly and bravely challenging the corrupt Republican establishment. This made her very popular with Democrats in Alaska. She worked in a bipartisan way, mainly to extract money from oil and gas resources in Alaska, and that was popular with everyone, pushing her ratings above 80% in Alaska. She was raking in money for Alaskans and challenging the big corporations (and their inside dealings). What's not for Democrats to like?

But once McCain brought her in as the vice presidential nominee and she launched into ripping up Barack Obama, her ratings plummeted in Alaska. And non-Alaskans never got up to speed about the things that had made her popular in Alaska. Can the movie make up for that now? I don't see how.

Suppose Palin-haters or Palin-non-lovers went to see this movie and absorbed the information about what originally made her so popular in Alaska. They aren't going to start liking her. Even if they were fair enough to recognize her early achievements, those achievements don't translate into the presidential realm. Where are the big corporations with ties to corrupt Republicans that she's going to fight now?

More importantly, Governor Palin's greatness came through working with Democrats! How would President Palin work with congressional Republicans? It can't happen now. What made her great in Alaska is now lost. It was lost in Alaska, after the '08 election, which is why — the movie shows this — she had to resign as governor.

Democrats were central to Sarah Palin's greatness: That is the argument in the movie. If that is true, there is no greatness upon which to build a presidential bid.

271 comments:

The point is that she was able to be bi-partisan and worked with people of good will. That has been destroyed, on purpose, by savage Democrat attacks on her, including the deluge of nuisance suits that drove her from office. I agree that she is unlikely to be a successful presidential candidate now given the success of the vilification campaign.

It is amusing to see the number of women who have bought into the vilification and who dislike her for reasons they can't enunciate.

Palin's "greatness" does not lie in party politics, but that she would look at the problem, figure out what looked like a sensible solution for the problem, and go for that. Thus she could work with the more sensible people of either party and be quite effective in pushing her ideas through.

She lost the Democrats in Alaska when McCain picked her for his V-P candidate, and they saw her on their TV screens, and "Oh, my God! She's a Republican!"

A lawyer's argument that I frankly can't follow. Look, what both independents and disaffected Democrats crave is a CLEAR alternative to statist Obama. Sarah fills that bill. The only way the Republicans can screw up, and I don't put it past them, is to offer independents and disaffected Dems a fuzzy non-alternative, i.e. Romney. Sarah will blow Urkel out of the water.

Right now, Sarah Palin remains a mystery to the MSM. Because she gives them no details. And, even when she's hired security for her arrival in Pella ... She got there without using what had been advertised. But she got there!

Donald Trump solves her money problems! And, the name of the party? ONE NATION ...

UNITED WE STAND was Ross Perot's vehicle. And, he started it with an appearance on Larry King. Where CNN was not among the "big 3." Back before the Internet came into play.

And, Ross Perot QUIT. Before election day. Slicing off a large segment of voters. He sliced off the elder Bush's second term, however.

And, given the stupid party's inability to learn anything ... Sarah Palin has already invested in the "how to" manual she will use.

Supposedly, Rick Perry is now some sort of favorite. (As if Texas will have another chance to send their governor into the White House. While Jeb Bush gets zero chance!)

I've picked Trump as Palin's veep ... because it would send a message that the BUSINESS MODULE has changed.

Interesting, too, that the media slapped the label TEA PARTY ... onto what had been (at Glenn Reynolds, at least) "THE PORK BUSTERS."

DC is contaminated by all the elites who feast at all the pork barrels.

Will we have unemployment? Sure. But there's gonna be a trade. The unemployed will be former Federal employees. And, their only hope will be to catch a boat to Oslo.

Frankly - we NEED someone who can work with the other side, who realizes it isn't a football game with two teams, but ONE team, supposed to be working for the American people.

We should NEVER, EVER again see a president, from any party, sitting up there talking about the other side.

Once elected, you represent ALL of the people. Partisanship is going to be the death of us and it makes for shitty politicians like Barbara Boxer.

Once elected, there should be no more 'party' - no more caucusing, no more us against them, no more fundraising for the party, period.

I disagree - this shows why she could be the best president this country has ever seen.

And seriously, do you think if she was in office now that we would be in this mess? Do you think she would be playing golf? Do you think she'd be squandering taxpayer money on jet-setting off to dinner.

The Obama facade is crumbling, how anyone can even begin to go on criticizing her in light of his catastrophic failures and activist moves is beyond me.

Oh, that's just silly. I have no doubt she would be a fine president if she could be elected; she is pragmatic, effective, and honest. But I think the anti-Palin propaganda has so poisoned the atmoshere that that is near impossible.

BTW, I salute your rational genius in voting for Obama. Like many of us, I suppose you realized that the Democratic Party needed killin' and Barack, with his record of non-achievement, disinterest in legislation, vast ignorance of almost everything, and left wing world view, was just the guy to pull it off. I didn't have the nerve to gamble on that myself.

That's some interesting reasoning. Palin was successful in Alaska because she worked with Democrats; therefore, she cannot possibly succeed as president, now that Democrats have demonized her.

Because, I guess, the only way she could ever get anything done is with Democrat support. Because that's how she got things done in Alaska.

There seems to be a pretty glaring "A implies B does not necessarily mean that B implies A" logical fallacy here.

Carol Herman, if Palin did form a third party, I don't think Trump (heh) would be real high on her list of VPs; and this would be about the only way Obama could win, is if someone were stupid enough to split the conservative vote.

But Crack's criticism of Ann in this regard is right on target. And I, like ricpic, can't follow the logic of her argument..

Sarah doesn't need ANYBODY to "work off of," she is a force of nature basically on inertial guidance--mainly because she knows herself, is comfortable with herself and has internalized her belief systems such that she isn't eternally testing the political winds. A weather-vane Sarah is not. As with Reagan, one has a reasonable expectation that she will consult those basic beliefs as a basic decision-making guide once in office. One never knows what the winds of world-wide current events--political or economic--will bring, but it's comforting to know that her INS (inertial navigation system in pilot-speak) is fully functioning..

wv: culat---Calling Trooper York! Did early 60s culats EVER come back into fashion?

I don't think Sarah Palin could work with the people presently dominating the Democrats in Congress, but if they destroy themselves in coming year, and it looks like they are trying hard for that, she might be just the person to pick up the pieces and lead us out of this mess.

"That's some interesting reasoning. Palin was successful in Alaska because she worked with Democrats; therefore, she cannot possibly succeed as president, now that Democrats have demonized her. Because, I guess, the only way she could ever get anything done is with Democrat support. Because that's how she got things done in Alaska."

No. I said that the implicit argument in the movie that some people think is convincing is in fact the opposite of convincing, because the foundation for her achievement is exactly what she has lost and can never get back.

You can add that it's not fair, because it means that the Democrats control her fate, but I'm not talking about what is fair. I'm talking about the lack of persuasiveness in the implicit argument in the movie.

Maybe there is some other argument, not made in the movie, but that's not what I'm talking about.

I went and saw the movie, I appreciated the very impressive things about Palin that people are talking about in connection with the movie, and I am telling you why those things don't translate into a reason for a current presidential bid.

Address precisely that if you want to say I'm wrong or that this is "pretzel" logic or "lawyer" talk.

If she wins our mainstream media would commit hari kari over their failure.

The suicide image suggests a capacity for shame. I have more faith in the MSM and believe they would only redouble their effort against a President Palin. And propaganda works – especially when someone thinks they are immune to it.

Ann ... given your past recommendations, (Obama) should we take you seriously about other candidates?

First and foremost, there isn't going to be a 3rd party this time around, except maybe on the left. The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party is calling the shots now in the House, and seems likely to get their way with the debt limit and cutting spending. All a 3rd party candidate for President would do, would be to let Obama keep the White House. Everyone knows this, and it is too important this time to get him out of there. The Republicans have a serious chance this coming election of regaining both the Senate and the Presidency, and with that, rolling back much of the damage that Obama and the Democrats have done over the last 2 1/2 - 4 1/2 years. They give up this opportunity with a 3rd party candidate, so it just won't happen. Better to roll back some of the stuff with a Romney than none if Obama is reelected. (And that ignores that the Tea Party is likely going to have a major impact on which Republican is nominated).

Pretty ignorant essay for a smart woman. The movie's job is to counter the prevailing meme created firstly by the 400 JourNoListers and echoed to this day by the MSM or lamestream media, leftists and a curious gaggle of people on the right, mostly conservative intellectuals.You may not have liked it, many did.

Neither the establishment Democrats nor the establishment Republicans will elect Sarah Palin President of the US in 2012. Rather it will be an insurgent campaign with a surprising number of those Democrats you mentioned joining in. One of Palin's many strength's are Reagan Democrats. I would not be surprised to see her do even better in this demographic than Reagan himself.

All I can say Ms. Althouse is, watch and learn because it seems you need to.

Maybe a good place to start is the Heritage Foundation where Stephen Bannon makes a articulate case for Sarah Palin:

"Someday I'd like to read a reasoned explanation from a lefty on why they hate her so much. No spitting or sneering or yelling."

And I'd like a wild night with Christina Hendricks. I'm infinitely more likely to get my wish than you are, Mark.

The 'hate' boils down to three reasons - she sounds like a hick, she didn't abort her untermenschen and she dared (DARED!) to blaspheme Little Black Jesus. Every criticism of her is, at the bottom, a mixture of those sins.

While I'm still a long, long way from being sold on her being a viable candidate, the question of who liked her (apparently a majority Democrat bloc of that 80% according to AA) has nothing to do with her achievements. Achievements exists with or without popular support. They just are.

I wrote, several months ago, that Althouse was laying the ground work for a SECOND Obama vote. My theory stands…”Palin isn’t good enough to be POTUS, so RELUCTANTLY I shall be FORCED to cast my vote for Obama.” Agreed, my theory requires that Palin be the nominee; but I believe she will be. Althouse, like any good runner, is getting her excuse ready in advance…Runner, on Wednesday before the big race, “Oh I think I did something to my knee/hamstring/ankle today running.” Runner on Saturday of the race, “I would have done better, but remember I said I thought I did something to my knee/hamstring/ankle, yeah I did and it held me back all race.”

Althouse is, 16 months out, preparing the battlefield to justify her decision to vote for Obama, “Remember, back in July 2011, I said the Undefeated was proof of Palin’s unfitness.”

I like Palin in that she can spell out an argument and talk in a plain manner about the issues. But as to a leader, forget it. I have seen her address issues in unscripted situations. It is not pretty. For some reason, she views oil companies as bad guys that are trying to get the best of her when she was governor. This sounds just like something a Democrat would say or think. This is the attitude that the US has exhibited toward the corporations that work here since FDR. In order for the US to survive, we need a different attitude. We need to understand the business in the US is what makes us and pays our bills. Palin seems to prefer to think they are the bad guy.

Professor: your political judgment is, unfortunately, wrong. continue to write about the law, but you have been so egregiously wrong about Mr Obama, your credibility re politics is in shreds despite your valiant efforts to justify your bad judgment.

That said, still plenty of time for a major contender to Mr Obama to emerge. Lets see what happens after Iowa next year.

More importantly, Governor Palin's greatness came through working with Democrats! How would President Palin work with congressional Republicans? It can't happen now. What made her great in Alaska is now lost.

The Tea Party has forced House Republicans to brave the assault from Obama, to refuse to capitulate to Democrats on spending increases.

Palin hasn't lost anything because she was fighting Republicans in Alaska and now cannot battle Republicans. She can battle Democrats now, especially because Republicans are now more closely aligned to her, thanks to the Tea Party. The battle is not with "Democrats" - the battle is with no-drilling, high-tax, high-spending, Wall-Street sucking politicians. That's what she fought in Alaska and it's what she can fight in Washington.

With contestants such as Lynn Swann, John Mellancamp and Kristin Davis vying for the right to run for the Governor of Guam, the show will be the unexpected ratings champ of second tier reality TV shows, in ways Roseanne Barr only dreamed of.

As a matter of tradition, the Presidential candidate takes the "high road" and tries to not be perceived as going after the opposing candidate. The VP candidate is assigned that job. Sarah Palin performed well in that role.

In Alaska Gov. Palin broke the rice bowl of a number of establishment Republicans and a good part of her support is from Republicans who hope she can do the same on the national level.

If Gov. Palin decides to run, I will support her.

However, whoever is elected in 2012 is in for a very difficult ride as sometime during the 2012-16 period we will be forced to come to grips with out of control government spending. The measures that bond markets will force upon governments will be severe.

As for Palin, she is almost scary in how good she is. No one these days, on the right or the left, can get a political meme going like she can. One time it is Death Panels, and the next is how lame Obama is. She seems to have an uncanny sense of how to phrase pretty much every debate.

But that may not be what is needed for a President. We shall see. My guess is that the best place for her would be as RNC chair. But, that sort of post gets sticky when you get a President from the same party. My second (or maybe third after President) would be as secretary of some department, and I am thinking that Interior would be a perfect fit. She wants to Drill, Baby Drill, and that would be the best place for that, and to do so safely.

I really don't think that working with Democrats is going to be that important in a year and a half. They are unlikely to have either House of Congress, and Obama has shown himself totally unable and unwilling to work with Republicans, so why hold her to that standard, without holding him to it?

One difference is that the Democrats in Congress are going to be fairly neutered. Harry Reid is just not type who can motivate the country against her, and the House is structured such that Pelosi is going to continue to be irrelevant.

Besides, I think that she can deal with Reid just fine - they could go out shooting together. Realistically though, Reid is from a part of the country that is sympathetic to Palin. The two of them can speak a lot of the same language (unlike with Pelosi). Both have 5 kids, are into family values, etc. (remember, Reid is LDS). And, I think that she could charm him. Not into impotence, of course, but into a working relationship.

And, that relationship may be sufficient to keep his position as party leader in the Senate. Of course, on the flip side, a lot of those Democratic Senators from more conservative states are likely to be moving out of the Senate offices in a year and a half, and they are likely the ones who gave Reid the job over Schumer. And, the Senior Senator from New York is clearly someone whom she most likely could not work with.

For some reason, she views oil companies as bad guys that are trying to get the best of her when she was governor.

Uh because there are/were? It’s called “rent seeking” and you can see it all the time under Obanomics…It’s inherent in any business/government interaction…each has interests, that may collide or collude…businesses seek to maximize profit…why WOULDN’T you view them as bad guys, interested in getting as good a deal as humanly possible, up to and including bribing or legally bribing officials, Republican OR Democratic, to use the powers of the “state” to advance their interests or minimize costs?

One example, would be the “Regulation of the California Energy Market in the 1990’s”…Energy companies used the powers of the state to insulate themselves from outside, and cheaper, competition, in the legislation. They paid for this in the form of, then affordable, energy price roll-backs. Another might be Immelt and GE incestuous relationship to the Federal Government or GM’s CEO calling for higher gas taxes, to spark demand for the Chevy Volt. You’re not silly enough to buy that old adage, “what’s good for GM is good for America” are you?

As a matter of tradition, the Presidential candidate takes the "high road" and tries to not be perceived as going after the opposing candidate.

If the GOP is going to win this time around (assuming everything, including the debt limit debate, keeps the status quo about where it is), the winning candidate will have to had bucked that traditional arrangement. The GOP candidate will have to go full-metal rottweiler on the incumbent. Frankly, given the record, public statements (both before and during his term as POTUS), and such, it shouldn't be hard. What WILL be hard is going on the attack and staying on the attack.

The body politic is spoiling for a real fight. The usual downsides with negative campaigning will either be irrelevant or seen to be acceptable risks for victory in the national election. Honestly, I don't see in the incumbent pulling ANY punches this time around because they've got an albatross of a record to deal with and what better way to do so than to go full on rottweiler first?

I take it you think there is no corrupt establishment in Washington? That both the Democrats and Republicans are clean as Wisconsin snow?

If there ever was a situation calling for a Sarah Palin Hollywood central casting could not have come up with a better situation. Here we have TBTF banks, crony corporations and financial organizations sucking the wealth out of people from Los Angeles to Slovakia. An ossified, rent seeking class, what Angelo Codevilla called recently "The American Ruling Class" full of outmoded ideology, nepotism, bravado, bankrupt literally and metaphorically, dreaming empty green dreams and Althouse thinks we need more of the same.

Hey, the country class has picked their filly and they fully expect her to win the triple crown.

"Ivan Moore, a local pollster, recently found that Palin's support had slipped to 68 percent. The poll was conducted from Sept. 20 to 22 among 500 likely Alaska voters and has a margin of error of 4.4 percent. Inside those numbers was a dramatic drop in support from Democrats and independents, although support from Republicans remained strong at 93 percent. Among Democrats, her approval rating dropped from 60 percent to 36 percent, a 24-point drop. Among independents, it fell from 82 percent to 64 percent, an 18-point drop."

The plummet is in the non-Republican categories. Isn't it interesting to see that 60% of Democrats approved of her before her dance with McCain?

McCain wrecked her potential by ruining her chance to make Democrats nationwide come to like her. They had to jump on her immediately and destroy her. And they'll never be wooed now.

"Palin has been victimized, but she is not a victim. She has not only slipped the mainstream lynching noose but turned it into a lasso for herself. This infuriates — and frightens — the media. It is why theycan’t stop. It was also what infuriates and frightens the trolls. It is why they can’t stop.

Remember – the trolls are all about fear.

Only fear and loathing can explain the mephitic repetition of their comments. They are terrified of this woman. They know she has hit upon (by dint of simply being herself – her true “secret”) something which will upend politics and the RINO establishment as we’ve known it as wellas the oppressive dominion of the media.

Palin is shattering cultural and media paradigms. This is exciting to many people. But it is profoundly disturbing and frightening to many others.

(I recommend Robert Kaplan’s brilliant essay “Media and Medievalism” for a perspective on the revolutionary nature of what is happening and the underlying “disturbance in the force field” caused by Palin (and of course the fear and anxiety it incites). This essay was written aboutsix years ago and is not about Palin, but there may be no better analysis of the media’s and the mass culture’s’ nature, power and aims, and one can easily draw from it how and what Palin is doing to subvert them.)

Kaplan likens the media to modern version of the medieval Catholic Church; he sees the media as a self-anointed superclass entrusted with and sanctioned by the “truth” and with special rights of authentication and interrogation unconstrained by constitutional or societal checks.Palin has defied them, gone around them and otherwise called out their unfitness and fraudulence. She has essentially “defrocked” them. This is an outrageous heresy to the mainstream culture (liberals and RINOs sustained by media authority). It has made Palin an intolerable threat and terrifying potentiality which cannot be allowed to develop."

This is why in their attacks on her they never allow the assumption that she can win; they never present Palin as someone who might win and then do undesirable things or make decisions they don’t agree with. Rather (and this is how they disguise her threat) they describe her assomeone who is hapless and inadequate, i.e., a quitter. It is her lack of qualities, her deficiencies, which deserve our contempt, they say. This, they believe, neutralizes the sense of destiny and redemption she inspires in people who feel their country is being lost to a degenerate ruling class which few are standing up against with clarity and courage.This, they believe, undercuts the heart of her appeal and potential. They see it as the most effective way to bring her down – by aborting the possibility of a run in the first place and demoralizing her supporters.

In a strange turn of events, however, the barrage of arguments intended to destroy her are becoming a motive for interest in her among others. These attacks by society’s “destroyers” will continue to validate her candidacy among many curious and concerned liberals, democrats and independents, who will continue to discover her decency and character. This likelihood is beginning to strike new fear into the hearts of her reactionary enemies, whether on the Left, in the papal media or among the frightened trolls who, for whatever political or personal reasons cannot abide this revolutionary woman and cannot stop their attacks. When she announces, their claims that she never intended to run and was only teasing her supporters will of course be conveniently thrown down the memory hole. The same trolls who said this will shamelessly reappear and double down on their claims that she’s a quitter, cannot finish the race, and/or cannot win the general election. This refrain will become desperate and deafening. That is because they must stop the sense of inexorable motion against enormous odds which, in part, they have worked to create, and which inspire her base and stir interest in her as an authentic “rebel” figure or true and organic political “outsider.” Once again, all their attacks will have worked against them, not her.

The beautiful paradox and perversity of this will be that the haters – and the totality of overweening one-dimensional hate from all sources – will be the things that help convert her candidacy into something interesting and worthwhile to those the hate was intended to alienate.It will also continue to strengthen her core support. This spins the cycle of fear, desperation and hate.

The trolls who appear here understand on some level the originality of who she is and what she is doing and the necessity of it for our time. It terrifies them."

I don’t expect it, exactly. But I do think the time is ripe and that Perot showed it could be done. And Palin fans(I’m one) could be the enthusiastic base that could make it happen.

I think most of the distaste for Palin is a class-lifestyle issue, a NOKD(not our kind, dear) thing, rather than strictly political in nature. But because this is America, where class distinctions are ostensibly fuzzier than elsewhere, this factor is somewhat veiled. That kind of undemocratic impulse must be rationalized in order to eliminate the cognitive dissonance; no one likes to think of themselves as a snob …

On the other hand, her appeal stems from that same sort of feeling(she’s one of us!). And perhaps there’s more of us than the number of voters the GOP and the Dems respectively can marshal in an election. I think a huge amount of folks have voted for either of the present 2 parties because they really had nowhere else to go. I say run, baby, run

She lost the Democrats in Alaska when McCain picked her for his V-P candidate, and they saw her on their TV screens, and "Oh, my God! She's a Republican!"

Something like that happened in the 2010 California election. The DA from Los Angeles was running for state AG. He was leading in all the polls until the voters suddenly realized he was a (gasp!) Republican. His polling turned south and a nonentity from San Francisco was elected AG.

The answer to Althouse's point is present in the movie as well. Palin creates her own coalitions wherever she goes, to overcome party affiliations which are smothering. She is the Althouse of politics. In AK, using Dem hatred of GOP to overwhelm the GOP she loves. On the national scene, using the Tea Party, feminist sympathy, libertarian gays (Tammy Bruce was the star of the movie), old Reaganites, the disaffected, etc. for a new coalition, which at present gives her around 40%. You go to war with the army you have!

Neither the establishment Democrats nor the establishment Republicans will elect Sarah Palin President of the US in 2012. Rather it will be an insurgent campaign with a surprising number of those Democrats you mentioned joining in. One of Palin's many strength's are Reagan Democrats. I would not be surprised to see her do even better in this demographic than Reagan himself.

This is important. I was reading an article yesterday, I think from Michael Barone, which looked at how mid-term Congressional elections tend to predict Presidential elections. But what was really noticeable was that the demographics for the partys are changing, and one of the biggest swings is with the group he calls "Jacksonians". They are a significant chunk of the Reagan Democrats, and they shifted hard right in the last election.

The Jacksonian belt runs roughly along the Mason-Dixon line, and this group has a major impact on the vote of a number of swing states, including PA, OH, VA, etc.

And, one of the things that the lame stream media intentionally ignored in the last Presidential election, is that this is the part of the country where Palin was treated like a rock star at her political events.

I think though that any Republican likely to run, excluding Romney, is likely to do well with the bluer collar parts of this country, which are part of the Reagan Democrats.

One of the problems that I think that Obama is going to have throughout much of the interior of the country is that he is an elitist. Best education. Best tastes. Best vacation locations, etc. Romney can compete there (2 Harvard graduate degrees, as compared to Obama's 1). But the rest of the candidates tend to run against this. The Best and the Brightest have managed to increase government spending by 4+% of GDP, increase the debt by $4+ trillion, etc., with no end in sight to the recession that they squandered this money to supposedly fight. Now is the chance for middle-America to vote for common sense, which means pretty much any Republican candidate besides Romney (not that he might not have it, but he has those elitist credentials).

The questions re Ms Palin are: is she cool, intellectual, pragmatic, and grounded? And is she John McCain? and could she fuck things up any worse than the incumbent president has already more than obviously demonstrated?

In a choice between the incumbent and Ms Palin, my choice would be Ms Palin--but as others, including me, have pointed out, its way to early

Wow... its worse than I thought.... Althouse asks where is the corruption in Washington? WTF?

Is this a joke? The corruption in Washington is way worse than Alaska. In Alaska, it was pretty straight forward.

Althouse has proven to me that her head is up her buttocks and I hope she keeps it there because taking it out will allow her to breathe some oxygen which would destroy whatever brain cells she still has left.

Yikes.... if this is how ignorant people like Althouse is, then America is worse off than I thought and maybe so far gone it can't be saved.

Even after all these years, I am flabbergasted when I hear that someone I thought fairly intelligent with common sense, voted for Obama. Geez, could it have been more obvious that he was completely unqualified! In truth, I have to hide my anger. This is supposed to be a free country, but we are suffering at the hands of people who should not vote.

I think most of the distaste for Palin is a class-lifestyle issue, a NOKD(not our kind, dear) thing, rather than strictly political in nature. But because this is America, where class distinctions are ostensibly fuzzier than elsewhere, this factor is somewhat veiled. That kind of undemocratic impulse must be rationalized in order to eliminate the cognitive dissonance; no one likes to think of themselves as a snob …

I think that this is also true. Palin speaks to the middle to lower-middle class, and turns off the upper middle class. Mostly - by trade, upbringing, and education, I would probably be in that category, but she is still my favorite candidate, so it isn't universal.

My personal observations are just that, that much of the Republican establishment is that educated upper-middle class that distrusts and dislikes Palin. I know my father is this way, and I think my mother would have been extremely antagonistic towards Gov. Palin. She is just not one of "us". Obama is one of those who did what we (as a class) are supposed to do - go to Columbia, HLS, etc. And, so, despite his dangerous intentions and actions, he is somehow safer than one of "those" whom we build our walls to protect ourselves from.

(And I should note that Prof. Althouse, by all those same reasons that I put myself in that category, is most likely a member of that social class that especially finds Gov. Palin threatening - which is not to say how she will vote, but rather, point out why she may not have warmed up to Palin as much as some have).

The left liked McCain more than Palin. Just look at who catalyzed their caterwauling in the Fall of 2008. The left will scream louder about Palin going forward, even absent McCain. But the average Democrat is not a leftist. Democrats are welcome back into the tent of common sense.

Althouse's use of McCain as the wedge which split Democrats and Palin is telling. What I see instead is a further demonization of McCain on Althouse's part and this is quite understandable because this thesis is central to her decision to vote for Obama in 2008.

Maybe what some of us know is news to Ann Althouse. All over the United States there is a gathering army and their banners yet unfurled carry the image of Sarah Palin. Without any official effort Sarah Palin has the best ground game in Iowa. How did that happen Ann? is she a magician? Running a secret campaign out of a bunker in Arizona? Good at mental telepathy?

Ann thinks the movie is the the main act. The movie is a skirmish along the vanguard. The army has yet to make an appearance.

Sarah Palin has said she is all for vigorous competitive primaries. All of us, including Ann Althouse, will soon see.

I think most of the distaste for Palin is a class-lifestyle issue, a NOKD(not our kind, dear) thing, rather than strictly political in nature.

Jim Geraghty, of the National Review observed, in passing, that he had met a large number of upper-class Republicans WOULD NOT vote for McCain because of Palin…Excuse me!? As one Veep said, “The Office isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit.” Who CARES who’s Veep? And yet, they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for this unlettered, Chillbillie, this Caribou Barbie, instead they voted for the Ivy League, Sharp-Pants Creases of Obama. These people are contemptible. America’s Ruling Class, Codavilla, deserves our contempt.

The movie reminded me of how awful it was when McCain suspended his campaign because of the financial crisis. He had been doing well in the polls as a result of bringing in Palin, but when he did that, he blew it.

You are right that I decided not to vote for him because I thought he didn't have what it would take to deal with the economic matters that had moved to the fore.

Palin got caught in the crossfire. She didn't get to control and manage her move into the national spotlight. It will be very hard for her to rebuild a national reputation from the place she ended up.

It's a shame. I think she's a good person and a very talented politician. But she accepted McCain's offer and that had consequences for her reputation.

Hmmm--First off, professor, I dont really have to answer your questions because I am not a student of yours--your schtick works with the 1 and 2Ls that have to take your questions. Not with me.

The professor poses some questions re the nature of a potential Palin campaign; eg, what corporate corruption? That answer is obvious: Stimulous money funnelled to unions and other corporate stooges to gain support.I think it is has the possibility of a winning message, but time will tell.

He was poorly aided by the likes of Schmidt, who chose to tank the match, like the 1919 Black Sox, but one can't say that she ever got that memo, as she warned exactly what wewould be facing with Obama,

Which means she might be able to garner a 30-some odd percent of Democrats as a third party candidate.

Ain't gonna happen.

Palin isn't going to run as a 3rd party candidate, and the Tea Party is not going to let Obama keep the White House as punishment for running Romney as the Republican nominee. Ok, maybe the part of the Republican party that gave me the choice of Sharon Angle and Harry Reid in the last election might.

But, Palin won't run 3rd Party. She either runs as a Republican, or doesn't run. She is not about to ruin the Republican party for her own vanity, and let Obama get a second term as a side effect. She is too patriotic to do that. She knows, probably better than many, how much damage he has already done to this country.

And, Palin is the only viable 3rd party candidate. When she tells her Tea Party stalwarts to vote Republican instead of for the 3rd party candidate, that is what most of them are going to do. Not necessarily because she said so, but rather, because her reasoning will be persuasive. When she says to the faithful that the only way to get Obama out of office, and to reverse what he has done, is to hold their noses if they have to, and vote Republican, that will be it for any 3rd party candidate.

I happen to be reading McCain's "Faith of My Fathers." I paid it no attention during the election and only got interested in it recently because I got interested in his grandfather and father after visiting Pearl Harbor.

Did Obama write much about his grandfather in his books? What is his claim to familial continuity?

"Translate that into a realistic campaign that you can honestly see her mounting in 2012? What corporate corruption will she make the centerpiece of her campaign?

I didn't say there was none. I just don't see her making her campaign out of that now. Is there any sign of that? If she tried it, would anti-corporate-type Democrats come over to her side?"

Answer, yes. For example:

"We need to be on our guard against such crony capitalism. We fought against distortion of the market in Alaska when we confronted “Big Oil,” or more specifically some of the players in the industry and in political office, who were taking the 49th state for a ride. My administration challenged lax rules that seemed to allow corruption, and we even challenged the largest corporation in the world at the time for not abiding by provisions in contracts it held with the state. When it came time to craft a plan for a natural gas pipeline, we insisted on transparency and a level playing field to insure fair competition. Our reforms helped reduce politicians’ ability to play favorites and helped clean up corruption. We set up stricter oversight offices and ushered through a bi-partisan ethics reform bill. Far from being against necessary reform, I embrace it."

"Commonsense conservatives acknowledge the need for financial reform and believe that government can play an appropriate role in leveling the playing field and protecting “the dynamism of American capitalism without neglecting the government’s responsibility to protect the American public.” We’re listening closely to the reform discussion in Washington, and we know that government should not burden the market with unnecessary bureaucracy and distorted incentives, nor make a dangerous “too-big-to-fail” mentality the law of the land."Sarah Palin

Prof. Althouse, by all those same reasons that I put myself in that category, is most likely a member of that social class that especially finds Gov. Palin threatening …

Well, in defense of Ms. Althouse I think her voting record in elections previous to Obama proves that she is not knee-jerk in her political choices. In a social context, who knows? But her rationale for her Obama vote leaves me smiling.

I think that this is also true. Palin speaks to the middle to lower-middle class, and turns off the upper middle class. Mostly - by trade, upbringing, and education, I would probably be in that category, but she is still my favorite candidate, so it isn't universal.

And I too am not your stereotypical Palin supporter but I liked her the first time I saw her and have seen nothing since to diminish that appeal. I think they call it charisma. The gal has guts.

Here’s some fun I’ve been having: What to name a Palin-headed third party. I’ve rejected Tea Party.

Also, advice to a third party Palin campaign:

(1) Never allow the MSM to tape an interview that they can edit – live interviews only.

Roger, hate to break it to you, but no. I don't need the illiterate Caribou Barbie traipsing around in the White House. Palin would never win, and I would be thrilled to see her run. After watching the painful VP debate in 2008 (both sides), I don't need anymore of this garbage.

Sidenote: Hilarious story about the empty theater one movie critic saw this film in. Palin is a national joke...a very, very obnoxious joke.

She couldn't even last 4 years as the governor of the least-populated state in the country. How do you expect her to make it through 4 years of the most taxing job in the US

Well for one thing she could have a “Legal Defense Fund”…oh and don’t use “quit”, use “Abdicate” that’s the new Palin Concern Troll verbiage…you need to keep up. Also, I guess she could take up Golf, as the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. has, it seems to pass the time quite well for him. And there are the vacations, Martha’s Vineyard, Hawai’i…and the like, they seem to keep Teh Won’s “Axe Sharp.” Finally she can use the first 2.5 years of her term blaming Obama for any and all ills.

I think the Professor is among those who do not like Sarah Palin, but does not want to face up to why, so she makes up a lot of phony excuses for her antipathy.

Did AA read the article by the Wall St. high-flyer who thought she might accede to a fling with Robert Rubin, but changed her mind in time? IIRC, I think she said Rubin is looking for a job and thinks 40 million + bonuses would be a suitable beginning salary for himself.And AA asks where is the corporate corruption the Sarahcuda might attack? Professor, it is in front of your nose!

So, I guess it's safe to say you never had a problem when Bush took vacations? After all, no other president in the history of the US took more than he did.

Sidenote: Every poll that's Obama v. Palin has Obama crushing her...and this is from the right-wing Fox News AND Rasmussen. Bachmann, Romney, Perry, hell, even Paul--those races are close. But Palin? Landslide win for the left.

chickenlittle said...I didn't say there was none. I just don't see her making her campaign out of that now. Is there any sign of that? If she tried it, would anti-corporate-type Democrats come over to her side?

You should go back and re-listen to the speech she gave in Madison. Were her words antagonistic towards Democrats, teachers, or Unions? Which of those three groups was she trying to reach?

The latter two. Her speech never mentioned "Democrats." Nor "Republicans." The only party movement she mentioned by name was the Tea Party movement.

Palin: "I am here today as a patriot, as a taxpayer, as a former union member, and as the wife of a union member. What I have to say today I say it to our good patriotic brothers and sisters who are in unions. I say this, too, proudly standing here as the daughter of a family full of school teachers. My parents, my grandparents, aunt, cousins, brother, sister – so many of these good folks are living on teachers’ pensions, having worked or are still working in education."

Taxing to the extent you want to get your handicap down; taxing to the extent you was to raise huge sums of money to run your next campaign--Taxing to the extent you might want to put the fiscal house of the country in order? ummmm not so much. Taxing to the extent you want to commit US forces to yet another war? Umm not so much

taxing to the extent you want to close Guantanamo rather than interrogate prisoners on board US Naval ships? not so much

Taxing to the extent you want to raise taxes in the face of a major recession? Not so much

Anyway--you may get my drift here.

But if you think Ms Palin is somehow less qualified than the jug eared douchenozzle that is now occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, be my guest.

So, I guess it's safe to say you never had a problem when Bush took vacations? After all, no other president in the history of the US took more than he did. I just remember folks such as yourself hyper-ventilating about the Booooosh not doing the job, and now we have Teh Won, playing more golf in 2.5 years than the Boooosh did in 8….

Me I figure the POTUS is NEVER off duty, but IF one side is going to complain about going to Crawford Tx. or Camp David too much, they might want to stay at home and in the office a bit more themselves.

Ren: you are entitled to your opinion re Ms Palin, as I am entitled to mine about the incumbent POTUS--lets leave it at that. Voters will decide in 2012 and our opinions will be but farts in a whirlwind.

@Meade: That's exactly how I recall it, Meade. I had the distinct impression that she was trying to speak over the heads of the Tea Party people directly in front of her and instead to the opposition out beyond who were protesting her being there--at least those who would listen.

"You are right that I decided not to vote for him because I thought he didn't have what it would take to deal with the economic matters that had moved to the fore."

Then, you voted for Obama.

That's like jumping out of the plane because you think it's off course.

As I've said before, I don't think you were capable of voting against the first Black President, and especially a Democrat one. You imagined him being successful and having your vote against him in your bio was unthinkable.

"Victory Film Group and ARC Entertainment, the distributor of “The Undefeated,” the film about Gov. Sarah Palin’s rise from obscurity to national prominence, jointly announced today that beginning on September 1st the film will be available to 75 million homes via Video on Demand and Pay-Per-View access through national and regional cable and satellite operators. The DVD will launch on October 4th and will be available at traditional and online retailers nationwide. ARC is estimating its initial unit shipment to be approximately 250,000 units. A “Special Edition” DVD will contain additional new content and will only be sold in Walmart stores."

@chickenlittle: I don't think she was speaking to the opposition, the protesters. She was using them, very effectively, as a foil. I think she was speaking to patriotic Americans who feel abandoned by their parties - Democrat and Republican.

But I agree with Freeman - she won't be running in 2012. And if and when she does run, it won't be as a third party candidate. Ross Perot gave us Bill Clinton. Everyone knows that.

Ann? This was rather silly ...well, maybe not the film-as-movie bits (after all, anyone's opinion upon a movie are as valid as anyone else's ...though in the main these generally boil down to "Like" or "Did Not Like" LOL), but the political parts? - Gas, dear. Just trite.

According to your logic, anyone who's done a thing, can't be expected to re-do a thing, because the thing's done, and it's irrational to suppose the thing capable of needing done again. Or contributing to a similar thing EVER needing redone again.

Uh. You could use that as an argument against the validity of past experience being a predictor of future performance, I s'pose.

But people would - rightly - classify you as daft for doing so.

I love you dear (admittedly it took me a long time to make your blog a regular on my almost-daily reading list ...but I've long since come to appreciate your sanity and perspective), but this post was certainly not one of your high points.

Maybe you need to revisit this. Think it over a bit. Examine it as a reductio ad absurdem (or some such).

bagoh20 said...As I've said before, I don't think you were capable of voting against the first Black President, and especially a Democrat one. You imagined him being successful and having your vote against him in your bio was unthinkable."

Bingo number two. Exactly right. There are millions upon millions of white guilted people who won't do that this time.

The next time that will happen is when we have our first openly gay President.

One expects better arguments, there really aren't issues of policy. Then again if she had only said anythingas foolish as this:

The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that's not how our system works. That's not how our democracy functions. That's not how our Constitution is written," Obama said at the National Council of La Raza's annual conference.

… how awful it was when McCain suspended his campaign because of the financial crisis. He had been doing well in the polls as a result of bringing in Palin, but when he did that, he blew it.

You are right that I decided not to vote for him because I thought he didn't have what it would take to deal with the economic matters that had moved to the fore.

Let’s see now; McCain thought the economic crisis was so important that he suspended his Presidential campaign to attend to his senatorial duties re the economy but THAT proved McCain would not “have what it would take to deal with the economic matters?” Oh. My. That was the MSM narrative, too.

But, Palin won't run 3rd Party. She either runs as a Republican, or doesn't run. She is not about to ruin the Republican party for her own vanity, and let Obama get a second term as a side effect.

Would a viable third party ruin either of the 2 other parties? Maybe, or maybe a third party would force both of them to be less complacent – and less arrogant. I wouldn’t necessarily ascribe vanity as a prime motivation for shaking up the political system or assume that an Obama 2nd term is the inevitable result of a third party campaign. BUT, these are just nit-picking among the like-minded. Keep on commenting, friend.

Would a viable third party ruin either of the 2 other parties? Maybe, or maybe a third party would force both of them to be less complacent –A third party just puts the person you LEAST want there…A GOP-leaning third party puts Obama/Hillary into office, a Democratic-leaning one, puts Palin/Perry/Pawlenty in…people who voted for Nader, in FL, helped put Bush ’43 over the top…I’m pretty sure their preference order was NOT:Nader BushGore

Crack -- McCain was an awful candidate. When the financial crisis first became hideous, he tried to cancel a debate and looked as literally as a person can like a chicken running around with his head cut off.

McCain has always had awful candidate instincts, by the way. In 2000, in South Carolina, he attempted to run against guns, God, and religion. South Carolina. I am not making that up.

A third party has “succeeded” when one of the two parties implodes…The Federalists succeeded by the Whigs, the Whigs by the Republicans. Otherwise a third party simply helps the other ‘second party.” And why would the “other second party” change, as long as the Opposition is divided? Let’s say there is the TEA Party (22%) and the GOP (38%) AND the Democratic Party (40%). Why is the Democratic Party going to be less complacent and change? They’re winning, and will continue to do so as long as the 60% is divided.

There is a parallel thread going at C4P initiated by Ann's Post. Among the many good responses is this one:

"Fascinating premise:

That Palin's appeal was more to Democrats in Alaska than to the local GOP and thus her appeal is not transferable to the Lower 48 as the Democrats in the Lower 48 won't now embrace her because of her attacks on Obama and the GOP establishment won't embrace her because of her "history" with the GOP in Alaska and with the Murkowski's.

Considered one of the brightest legal minds in America (Althouse is a law professor) , Althouse clearly doesn't display the common sense of a simpleton like myself.

Two points:

1) She disregards INDEPENDENTS and especially than conservatives now make up 36% of all independents in America

2) The Republican grassroots, evangelicals, and the Tea Party movement in the Lower 48 are NOT the GOP establishment or the Beltway elite and comprise a huge portion of the GOP primary electorate. These are Palin-type supporters who don't give a rat's-ass the GOP establishment in Alaska don't see eye to eye with Palin.

In a previous era this may have been more important but in this age of the Internet a person like Palin can transcend her past political relationships."

"Four in 10 Tea Party members are either Democrats or Independents, according to a new national survey.

The findings provide one of the most detailed portraits to date of the grassroots movement that started last year.

The national breakdown of the Tea Party composition is 57 percent Republican, 28 percent Independent and 13 percent Democratic, according to three national polls by the Winston Group, a Republican-leaning firm that conducted the surveys on behalf of an education advocacy group. Two-thirds of the group call themselves conservative, 26 are moderate and 8 percent say they are liberal."

I'm talking about the lack of persuasiveness in the implicit argument in the movie. Maybe there is some other argument, not made in the movie, but that's not what I'm talking about.

I don’t know what difference it makes what the movies argument is. That movie is just preaching to the choir. Who is going to say “I hate Palin’s guts, thus I will spend my Saturday night at this 2 hour movie about how awesome she is”?

I haven't read through the thread. But wonder what Palin's cut of the film money is. Everything she has done from 2008 to now suggests that she wants to get paid, not be presidentI wonder what the motivation of two autobiographies of Obama were ?

Obama had a leader's demeanor, and no one then was willing to tell the truth about the Clean Looking Black Man's background...except for Caribou Barbie who always thinks better than most political gurus.

McCain wanted to preside over us like LBJ did in hopes that he could get everybody to go along with him without him really attacking the Bush/war fatigue problem.

I totally understand why a sharp mind like Althouse's ended up Hoping for a better leadership from a pragmatic Dem.

The problem with Obama has turned out where he wants to lead us...into total destruction.

The better question is: what kind of presidential candidate has a relaity show and sends her daughter to dress sexily on Dancing with the StarsFunny I thought Bristol an adult, so unlikely “sent” anywhere…and you are saying not only did she get ‘sent” but that she had a kickback arrangement with Mama? As to “Reality TV’ can’t comment never saw a whole episode, what I did see wasn’t like “Jersey Shore”, “Big Brother” or “Real Housewives of New Jersey” more like a travel monologue for Alaska and pre-campaign advertisement campaign for 2012.

I'm not complaining. I just find it interesting that the last three presidents have had daughters and not one of them has been a sexily-clad reality TV star.

You guys know I don't think Palin has the experience to be president. But you don't need to take everything I say about her as criticism. What I'm saying now is that I don't see what she's doing as acts prior to entering the presidential race.

Looking into my crystal ball I see a post by Professor Althouse on the morning of the first Wednesday in November:

"I think that Palin is a talented politician and would be a good president. However, after much deliberation, I voted once again for the the leftist man-child whose vain, petulant acts convinced me that he had the cool reasoned demeanor of a three year old. And who doesn't like children?"

Restructured the state's tax system, which has kept state solvent through these tough times, negotiated the AGIA deal with at least three oil companies, andas many countries, Canada and Mexico, swapped out state fundsfor stimulus funds, for economic development, that's three of them.

Grackle -- I think you are seeing criticism where there isn't any. I also think you are a thin-skinned ass clown.

SM, I’m hurt. I think you are seeing criticism where there isn’t any. Honest. Like you I’m also a capitalist and was merely feigning anger at Palin’s earning power.

And I’m NOT thin-skinned … well, maybe a little … and “ass?” Well … unless you count that time in the elevator at the atheist’s convention … but I tried to make amends to her … even offered to send her through medical school … and “clown?” Well there were those days when I used to have fun wearing a Lucha Libre mask. But the trapeze artists claimed it was distracting, darn it. Sigh.

narciso- I know she didn't come up with the name for the movie, but I don't know what the filmmakers were thinking.It certainly doesn't signal that it's a movie about Sarah Palin. It also signals too strongly that it will be propaganda-y. It isn't an inviting title to people who need to be convinced about her.

The Republicans in Alaska were very corrupt. Palin fought them as an outsider, as a citizen. I think that plays very well with the Tea Party crowd (obviously).

She has no interest in party politics and getting in bed with fat cats. We will see that in her campaign for president. She will get her money from ordinary citizens, over the internet. What Obama said his campaign (and his Presidency) would be, Palin will be.

This will play very well with lots of ordinary people, particularly people who hate what the people in the government have done to our economy.

Trad -- What I see is people not being able to deal with a frank assessment of Palin's weaknesses as a candidateIn your case the problem begins with saying all she’s been interested since 2008 is MONEY, and then following up with a claim she “Sent” her daughter to DWTS, and that she was on a reality TV show…NONE of these things are true….1) She has made money, but I’d argue it’s not the PRIMARY goal, and considering the Clintons and the Obama’s it’s not even worth mentioning…2) She sent an adult womon to DWTS? C’mon dood that’s just silly. I’m not sure it was WISE for Bristol to appear, but it wasn’t MANDATORY.3) “Reality TV” or “Travel Show”…..As I said, it’s ain’t RHONY, closer to Bear Grills than Jersey Shore.Can she win, I think so. WILL she win, mayhap not…but many of the “criticisms” leveled are foolish from illiterate, to Caribou Barbie, to your ill-chosen or thought-out criticisms. I’m not so much “thin-skinned” as dismissive…I have read a FEW good criticisms, mostly what I read is tripe…yours verged on tripe.

Some of us are saying that it is unlikely she will run because she's enjoying a very lucrative and influential career right now. I would be surprised if she were willing to drop all of that to take a swan dive into a meat grinder.

Seven Machos: Grackle -- My complete bad for reading your post wrong. I must be the thin-skinned one, as I get a lot of grief here for having the temerity to point out Palin's weaknesses. It must be projection on my bad. Sorry.

SM, there’s no need to apologize for reading my post wrong. Your first reading was mainly correct. So let’s you and me be open about our intentions, if you can bring yourself to do that.

We all knew your intent was to criticize Palin, which I think is fine with most of us, but to try to imply later that you were meaning to compliment her and to act as if you were wrongly interpreted was a bit rich, don’t you think? I just followed your lead on that.

Of course you are entitled to your opinions about Palin and of course we Palin-favorers are equally entitled to criticize them. Let the debate continue …

Some of us are saying that it is unlikely she will run because she's enjoying a very lucrative and influential career right nowWell Freeman to be brutally realistic…1) Ex-President’s make a WHOLE lot more;2) WHAT influence? Boehner has influence, Palin does not. Palin is as influential Althouse, which is to say, she is READ, but has no real POWER.POTUS Palin is wealthier and far more powerful, than ex-Governor Palin…it PAYS to run and win.

1. Palin does not have enough experience to be a successful president. She is exactly like Obama -- a cult of personality with no resume.

2. Palin quit her job that was giving her experience.

3. Palin has a low chance of beating Obama.

Having said all that, more elaborately and many times, I have also reminded people that I am a conservative libertarian and, of course, I would vote for Palin if she is the nominee, or Ron Paul, or a syphilitic camel. I voted for McCain after all.

Some of us are saying that it is unlikely she will run because she's enjoying a very lucrative and influential career right now. I would be surprised if she were willing to drop all of that to take a swan dive into a meat grinder.

Yeah, but she’s been in the grinder since McCain selected her. There’s no more grinding they can do than they’ve done already. Palin must be the most thoroughly vetted politician in history.

She may have enough money now that she could afford to take a few months off.

“Swan dive” implies she would be finished as a national figure if she lost a campaign bid or the election. But she was supposed to be over with when she resigned as Alaska Governor, wasn’t she? I think there’s something about her that has a lasting appeal.

I don't know if I would vote for Palin, but I'd like to hear who is superior and why their life experience, temperament, and record proves they would be better. Dem. or Rep.There is never any proof which candidate will make the better President. We're justified in making a judgment call on the basis of many things - including gut instinct.

Hard evidence? Probably none. What Althouse doesn't get is that Sarah is loved. By millions. I'm one of them. In fact I'm sure a shudder would run through her at the thought. And it's not that people of quality are above that sort of thing. Because they're not. Think Eleanor Roosevelt. The shudder is that millions love what? a woman who (to quote grackle) isn't "one of us." That's what is so off-putting about the love for Palin and about Palin herself. So not one of us. So not a sophisticate.

@freemanhunt: Do you think the media is holding back some gristle from the mill?

How much more do they have left to grind?

Pretty much everything they had before wasn't legitimate. I'm sure they'll be happy to write new fictions and to pick apart every move she's made since 2008, presented in the most negative frames possible of course.

They even had thousands of private emails to scour and all it proved was that she is a decent hard-working woman.

Who else could stand up to that expose and come out smelling sweet? I'm pretty boring, but I have more embarrassing email than she did. Imagine what a hostile press could do with just about any other candidate's email.

If nothing else, she is exceptional among politicians. Nobody like her.

There are plenty of corruptocrats at large. The problem she fought in Alaska still exists in the country. It's a matter of message and drive to get out the vote. It could be argued 2012 is at the same state Alaska was when she was elected.